The Construction of Identity in Medieval and Early Modern Times: Reflections on a Problem in Art History

International Conference

Seiteninhalt

Organizers

Peter Scholz M.A. (University of Zurich)

Prof. Tristan Weddigen (University of Zurich)

Lars Zieke M.A. (Freie University Berlin)

Concept

In recent years, studies on identity
have noticeably increased, not only in formerly core disciplines such as sociology,
gender studies or cultural sciences, but in art history as well. Concerning the
application of the term “identity” to art historical studies, however, either
the adoption of theoretical deductions from those disciplines is rarely
connected stringently to the objects of art or the usage of “identity” occurs without
consideration of its methodological and theoretical implications. This is especially
the case for the art of the medieval and early modern times. Therefore, this
international conference seeks to reflect fundamentally upon the usage of the
term “identity” in art history, to possibly revise established opinions, and to
problematize the possibilities for methodological orientation.

However, the term “identity” itself
is elusive. In light of the transdisciplinary heterogeneity of the term and the
great variety of identity theories, it might prove to be difficult to find a
definition, which could do justice to all different approaches. Yet, one common
denominator might be that “identity” presupposes that something can only be
identical with something, i.e. that the identified is situated within a
network, that it constitutes itself through relations. In doing so, it has to
be differentiated between personal and collective identity, which stand in
tension towards each other. This is demonstrated with regard to research on
medieval and early modern times especially by the controversial term of the “individual”,
underlining the foundation on processes of social interaction that are marked
by or are in opposition to class and rank. The social status, the confessional
commitment as well as the sexual attribution in this connection are considered
formative parameters. Yet, none of these parameters was unalterable. Identity
affiliations were convertible and under certain circumstances arbitrary.

How can we apply the disparate
identity theories on art history? What kinds of problems appeared in previous
research and will occupy us in the future? What are the possibilities and
limits of the transposition of such a term like “identity” in art history? And,
finally: which disciplines are particularly apt for transmitting the notion of
identity to art historical studies? For example, art historians have committed
themselves to engage in these issues for quite some time within the scope of
gender studies through questions on the relation between body and
representation and by breaking up traditional male-dominated canons of works, etc.
Art historians with a postcolonial approach, on the other hand, attempt to deconstruct
the identity-generating patriarchal and Eurocentric image policy. And, in the
end, more traditional art historical research also contributes to questions of
identity: such as in the case of studies on court culture and patronage, on
political iconography and symbolism, etc. Ultimately, even one of the
fundamental categories of art history, “style”, is part of a larger identity
discourse. “Style” refers itself mostly to the art production and art theory of
a specific region or group, to the single personality of an artist or a
workshop. The assumed characteristic relates to similarity in terms of formal
criteria, which is ascribed as a common feature to the majority of
manifestations of an epoch, a region, a person, etc. Style develops out of the
not always conscious, but presumably coherent selection, evaluation and
application of certain aesthetic properties. This manifestation of
identity-constructing affiliation takes place via dissociation from something
different. And, in the end, it is the very suppression of this affiliation
that, in turn, enables a personal style and identity.

As to analyze this set of general questions about the
art historical construction of identity, by reflecting once again fundamentally
on the relation between identity research and art history, the conference will
invite an interdisciplinary group of scholars, with focus on art history.